Net neutrality takes a major leap today!

Ok, let's discuss that. How does the news today impact your internet experience over the last 10 years in your opinion. I'm asking for specifics on that if you don't mind. I'm also curious if you consider all regulation to be bad. Did you think ma bell should have been broken up for instance?

The FCC's rules have yet to be made public... We'll see in the coming days...they had to pass it so we the people could see what's in it...

The FCC's rules have yet to be made public... We'll see in the coming days...they had to pass it so we the people could see what's in it...

It will be longer than that. The corporations have appealed and it cannot be made public until all appeals are dealt with. I'm just curious why your initial reaction is so negative. The one thing we do know is that the internet companies can't decide what speed websites are allowed to have but must continue to treat all sites equally. That has been the internet since its inception. Why is that bad?

Thanks for opening it up again. I understand that ideology although I don't follow it personally. But that being said, this doesn't increase government in any way much like not allowing monopolies doesn't increase government.

Ok. I'll leave this as an open question for those who are bothered by net neutrality. What about keeping the internet the same as it has been since inception is bad? What worries you about that? How is allowing corporations who profit from the change and allowing them to choose what sites can be viewed with normal speeds and what sites can't a good thing? Do those who are against this feel breaking up ma bell was bad or good? Thanks.

Ok. I'll leave this as an open question for those who are bothered by net neutrality. What about keeping the internet the same as it has been since inception is bad? What worries you about that? How is allowing corporations who profit from the change and allowing them to choose what sites can be viewed with normal speeds and what sites can't a good thing? Do those who are against this feel breaking up ma bell was bad or good? Thanks.

Posted via the iMore App for Android

I don't think it's a problem with how the internet will remain with this move...it is the invitation to the government to get involved in something that should have been handled with consumer actions. Now I understand that it was a little different, and that the lack of options to the consumer (for now) was something that was very much a charging point for the government intervention...but where does that stop? If there's something we've seen in the past, it's when you give them an inch, they take 1,000 miles.

I don't think it's a problem with how the internet will remain with this move...it is the invitation to the government to get involved in something that should have been handled with consumer actions. Now I understand that it was a little different, and that the lack of options to the consumer (for now) was something that was very much a charging point for the government intervention...but where does that stop? If there's something we've seen in the past, it's when you give them an inch, they take 1,000 miles.

I can agree to the apprehension but I view this more along the lines of reasonable regulation. I agree there is unreasonable regulation as well. But this does not seem like that to me. Beside mistrust in government motives do you see anything else nefarious about this?

I can agree to the apprehension but I view this more along the lines of reasonable regulation. I agree there is unreasonable regulation as well. But this does not seem like that to me. Beside mistrust in government motives do you see anything else nefarious about this?

Posted via the iMore App for Android

Outside of government motive, not really...but asking me that removes a very VERY large reasoning for my caution when it comes to this situation. Kind of like asking someone "Besides the fact that you don't like to eat tacos, why don't you want to eat tacos?"

Outside of government motive, not really...but asking me that removes a very VERY large reasoning for my caution when it comes to this situation. Kind of like asking someone "Besides the fact that you don't like to eat tacos, why don't you want to eat tacos?"

That's funny. Yeah I get what you're saying. I think I have the same reaction to corporate interest. I do think this isn't an example of overreaching. Verizon and Comcast and the other characters flooded money to many congress men and women trying to stop this. I feel good that for a change our government might have actually represented us and not those with the most cash. But I fully intend to continue to follow it and not just assume.

Verizon and Comcast and the other characters flooded money to many congress men and women trying to stop this. I feel good that for a change our government might have actually represented us and not those with the most cash. But I fully intend to continue to follow it and not just assume.

^^^^ This. Government AND Corporations both have their faults. You have to pick your sides at times because one side isn't always right. Applying sweeping generalizations is a fool's game.

It's funny verizon threw a hissy fit when the ruling didn't go their way, yet they were the ones who started all of this when they sued a few years back to get rid of net neutrality. That being said, I am not sure how I feel about this. Yes it is good for the internet, but do we really want the government in another thing? I mean look how many things they get their hands in and screw up? It becomes huge, bloated and burns through money, that ultimately, we the taxpayers have to pay for.

Just found out my water company wants to charge $100 per gallon. Stay out of it government!! Let them charge what they want!

That's the major problem when you run into a lack of consumer option and a group of service providers who are all kind of in the same crooked scheme. Consumers with no choice have no voice...but on the flip side, allowing the government to regulate EVERYTHING takes away choice as well and starts to dabble in the idea that companies cannot operate to make profit in any other way other than what the GOVERNMENT finds fair.

Where does it end? If we didn't have historic events of government overreach, this wouldn't even be a conversation...but because we know what they tend to do when we give them the power to regulate something, this is something that both pleases me and kind of worries me.

Now Comcast is throwing a temper tantrum screaming that the FCC is overstepping their bounds...LOL! They are throwing around words like "lawsuit" against the government. Funny that so much money was invested into Comcast to get their fiber optic system improved, but all I really hear lately is about how they've been using tons of money to try and keep net neutrality from happening so they have full reign over what their consumer base can access and at what speeds.

Un-freakin-believable. I'd get rid of Comcast TODAY if there was a service even remotely as good available. I simply cannot wait for google fiber to get fully setup in Atlanta next year. I'd do without cable to get rid of Comcast to be honest as long as I have great internet service.

However you slice and dice it, I really am on the fence about this. I'm sure each and every one of us here on a forum discussing tech are for net neutrality but at what cost? If I had to decide today whether I wanted government involved in keeping net neutrality, I'd have to say no. Because it's going to be F'd either way. Not only did Verizon open up this can of worms, but some others have followed. How about T-Mobile not counting your mobile data when using their handpicked streaming music apps? I was very surprised there wasn't more of an uproar about that. It felt exactly the same to me as Verizon shaking down Netflix. But since T-Mobile is perceived as liberal, I think that's why there wasn't that much of an uproar. Even tech sites like this.

What am I blabbing on about this for? Because at the end of everything the democratic voice is what has the loudest when it comes to media and social networking. For every FOX News there are 10 liberal media outlets you can point to. The government is going to get control of this whether we like it or not and the term "net neutrality" will still exist but won't mean exactly what it means as it does today.